In England & Wales, at the last count there were around nearly ‘three million’ silly adults still taking illicit drugs. Even more worrying, is prevalence of drug use among children in England, starting well ‘pre-teens’ and reaching the level of a quarter of all fifteen-year olds.

There are two types of idiots when it comes to illegal drugs; there are the ‘mind-blown’ clowns who take the bleeding things; and then there are the misguided fools and mindless ‘do-gooders’ who condone and support such crass behaviour. [Promoted and aided of course by the morons who provide such drugs as their crass method of earning a living, with totally zero regard for the havoc they play in the lives of the many afflicted].

You see a drug that interferes with the way in which the mind works is clearly suspect, because not only does it often severely adversely alter a drug-taker’s behaviour, but also it can have serious debilitating physical effects on the body’s function, and undeniably sometimes cause death, can’t it?

People who indulge in drug taking are basically flawed ‘inadequate’ characters who do so to escape the normality of life – some who persistently do so, whence it becomes a ‘way of life’ which ultimately destroys them, their families and their loved-ones, while others perhaps less unfavourably impacted, indulge in the misleadingly named self-styled “recreational drugs” (so often favoured by the rich & famous and their offspring, but also by working men, clubbers and the like, often in their 20s to get a so-called ‘high’), but that too regularly then spirals out of control when many of them get addicted, doesn’t it?

Drug misuse and taking seems to move in cycles, while for example we now see a massive 50% increase in a return to the use of the psychedelic drugs of the 60s & 70s (like LSD and Magic Mushrooms), together with an increasing use of all illegal drug internet supply (and worryingly an increasing amount supplied on the hidden ‘dark net’), particularly of ecstasy and cannabis.

It is in that climate that we now see a situation whereby a ‘privilege and wealth’ recipient (should know better) aristocratic, thrice married peer, yesterday’s man [one nobody Baron Monson (pronounced “Munson”)] is campaigning to have the common illegally used and abused drug cannabis, entirely ‘decriminalised’ while at the same time having the admittedly much more powerful psychosis causing (such as schizophrenia) skunk strain version ‘reclassified’ into the most dangerous category of illegal drugs (Class A) so that it would carry greater penalties – in “a war against skunk”, as he calls it?

Now, while it would certainly be perfectly legitimate of him to seek the latter (as it is up to a dozen times the stronger drug and is implicated in numerous murders), it is a totally perverse idea to suggest that the albeit less powerful ‘standard cannabis’ (“marijuana or weed” – which nevertheless in itself a major destructor of young lives, as well as a precursor of progression onto harder drugs), should become freely available, surely?

Of course, we should all feel a degree of sympathy for this sad man indeed, and that simply is because his twenty-one year old son died in a suicide, due to a devastating addition to skunk, which had made him introverted, prone to outbursts, and had a huge impact on his wellbeing – resulting in him being sectioned under the Mental Health Act shortly before his death.

Grief can have strange effects on parents, but that doesn’t excuse the stupidity of wanting to allow all and sundry defective and impressionably youths to enter the pathway to drug abuse and addiction, does it? The very idea that someone would stick to a ‘legalised’ cannabis joint so not take skunk, the more potent version of the drug, is simply perverse – but that’s the out of touch with common sense aristocracy for you, isn’t it?

This doomed campaign [Monson isn’t a sitting member of the House of Lords so isn’t actually involved in our legislature] is being supported by another sad father, whose teenage son was also a similar skunk addict, who had deteriorated into a delusional and paranoiac abyss, so when in a final psychotic episode he ended up stabbing his own mother eleven times and then very seriously self-harming himself (with life changing consequences), before finally being committed to psychiatric hospital and indeed prison for his crime. The boy started at 16 on cannabis then moved onto the higher potency skunk, and that powerful drug all but virtually destroyed him.

This end outcome of such drug abuse must have been devastating for the boy and his family, but recognising where it all started (with standard cannabis), how comes they want THAT actually legalised, eh? Are they sick in the head, or what?

In another shocking irresponsible move, the LibDems have now become the first party to actually fight an election promising a relaxation of the UK drug laws – that to start with legalising cannabis (much loved by the hippies in the 1970’s, you see?), so it can be taxed and sold on the high street (to your children in your town, village, or city, eh?). Their intention is to create a legal market for the production and sale of the substance to any idiot of eighteen or over (simply to generate up to £1bn per year in tax revenues, they think?). That bleeding party must be desperate for votes – but they don’t seem to realise that cannabis users will be much too stoned to turn out to vote, don’t you think?

[The government’s Home Office has no plans to legalise cannabis as there is a substantial body of scientific and medical evidence to show that it is a harmful drug which can damage people’s mental and physical health].

Those who excuse the use of say the likes of cannabis, do so on the basis that an equally (or even more?) damaging drug that is in widespread in use, and is perfectly legal in most parts of the world, is of course that of ‘ALCOHOL’. But they miss the unavoidable point that alcohol is a drug that, because can be naturally occurring (through fermentation of fruit), has been with mankind since time immemorial, and that particular genie is out of the bottle and can’t be put back in, don’t they? Simply because society has a major ‘uncontrollable’ problem with the drug alcohol and its widespread addiction, is no reason to allow other drugs to create similar problems, is there?

There can be no doubt that there has been a catastrophic failure in the War on Drugs and that has to be tackled with a new approach, doesn’t it?

What needs to happen in the UK is for ALL drug taking to be treated as an illness, rather than a ‘criminal offence’, and facilities to be improved to help those afflicted, don’t you think? The money our society expends on criminalising large sections of society, pursuing “users” and ‘banging them up’ indeed, would be better spent on rehabilitation – but please no more of the medical provision of alternative drug substitutes, that simply mask the problem and encourage users to carry on with their self-abusive behaviour, surely?. Drugs should remain “illegal” as such, but using, or simply being in possession of drugs for personal use, shouldn’t any longer be a criminal offence, don’t you think?

On the other hand though, the full force of the law should instead be SOLELY focused on the evil supply chain and ALL those who work in it to provide these illegal drugs and get people hooked, don’t you think? Even the small ‘on the street’ members of the ‘providers’ should feel the massive heat of justice, while the bigger fish should fear for their very comfortable evil lives, don’t you think?

In some countries drug dealing attracts the death sentence, and if that penalty is ever brought back for the UK (indeed as much of the population would wish, eh?), then that would have a dramatic effect on the trade, wouldn’t you think? In the meantime, mandatory life sentences with hard labour for the hard drug suppliers, without the possibility of parole, would be a reasonable starting point, wouldn’t you say? Perhaps though ALL of the criminals involved in the drug trade should be forcibly made to take the drugs they sell until they too are addicted or worse, perhaps?

[Fourteen countries, including America and Cuba, have the death penalty ‘available’ for drug traffickers but do not apply it in practice. In the six countries of China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam, Malaysia and Singapore drug offenders are known to be routinely executed]